ZareLots of people complained about the Tomcat/Phoenix retirement, but with an air launched SM-6 ERAM, the Super Hornet would certainly be a capable interceptor!!
Tomcat is not an interceptor, and SH will never be one. Both aircraft lack high supersonic cruise speeds, and combat radius at those speeds. Fitting an big radar and big missiles onto a fighter won’t turn it into a interceptor. It’ll just make it more suitable for occasional interception roles.
Looking at that analogy, Su-27P would be an interceptor then. R-27ER has 100+ km of kinematic range, and the radar is fairly long-ranged, too. However, Su-27P is an air superiority fighter, that can act as an interceptor in a way, if it’s required. Think of it this way; F-16 can do some CAS, but it wasn’t designed primarily for CAS, and it’s gonna do it lousier than dedicated aircraft such as A-10 and Su-25.
Thus, IMHO, F-14 is an air superiority fighter, with naval-based bomber interception as one of his roles. F-18E is an multirole fighter, that can also intercept if necessary. They can intercept, but they’re not interceptors.
ZareYup, i know, i was just reffering to the fact that Syrians are going to purchase an supersonic interceptor with thousands of km’s of range, and the distance between their and adversaries capital cities – 250 km.
About missiles, MiG-31E should normally come with R-33E. 20% less range than R-33. Maximum kinematic range should be around 130 km. Also fitted with R-40TD1 and R-60MK.
This aircraft is quite old. It’s an downgraded Izdelye 01DZ. It’s still marketed as only export Foxhound in Rosoboronexport’s catalog. However, i don’t see why Russia wouldn’t sell something more capable to Syria. Since Russia doesn’t use 01DZ in active service anymore, the export machine could have all long-range A2A potential of 01DZ (that means, 20% more missile range via R-33, and at least 20% more capable radar, original SBI-16). The Zaslon could use newer DSPs, for A2G capability and RVV-AE usage. R-73 support might also be nice, since Syrians are using Fulcrums and going to get some new ones. Basically, this would be something close to MiG-31FE.
This machine should still have 30% less long-range A2A capabilities than VVS’s MiG-31B/BS, so it wouldn’t be Russia exporting something equal to their own.
ZareIn USAF case, probably not.
Their “common” enemy has outdated fighters, so it’s better to send a pair of Raptors onto some wasted 3rd gen / early 4th gen fighters, with an 99.9% chance of “downing them all”, then to send equally crappy fighters in number parity, and to risk the loss of the some.
On the other hand, hypothetical scenario; VVS has the same number of PAK-FA’s as USAF has F-22’s, the number of JSF vs I-2000 is equal, the number of F-18E and Su-27BM is equal…then the both would seek the solution you suggested. Cheap simple fighters, just to crunch the numbers.
ZareI know an ex. MiG-29 pilot who played LOMAC, and didn’t have anything to say about SPO-15. But he had quite few words about other things.
Zare250 km…hehe, once the Foxhound comes close to the border, half of Israeli Airforce will get painted by the Zaslon 🙂
ZareBy that rational a 1960s YF-12A would be a better interceptor than today’s Mig-31. After all you can’t upgrade a Mach 2.35 for 40 minutes airframe to Mach 3.2 for 60+ minutes.
If it had a better radar and a better missiles, why not? However, the MiG-31 can manuever a bit, YF-12A hardly can. On the other hand, all manuevering that an interceptor should do, would be to reverse and burn away. That’s why i was always fond of Tu-160P and similiar ideas.
However, in terms of operational cost, crew training and war performance, YF-12A would be years behind any MiG-31. What type of runway, and what lenght, does YF-12A need to takeoff / land?
ZarePaul, i know, but i wasn’t going to write elaborate stuff, because topic hasn’t demanded so. Maybe my example was bad.
With priority allocation, you can see the heading and the above / below aspect of the, let’s say, teen fighter. When you pick up his radar, you’ve got slow beeps, when he locks you, you’ve got a constant beep, and when he launches SARH, you’ll get a fast beep.
Now, that teen didn’t launch a SAM missile, right? 2+2 = 4.
BTW, there isn’t a indicator about ARH’s either, but from what i’ve heard, there’s a distinct fall, then huge rise in the signal level, once the head goes active.
With all the stuff SPO-15 is giving out, you can filter various kinds of threats. The point is, they are not classified by sound. Emmision, lock and launch will give same sound outputs for each categoty of threats you mentioned above.
ZareMoney and influence.
For example, Croatia, is on it’s way to NATO. We need to purchase a new fighter force, to replace old MiG-21bisK. Regarding geography, economics, needs and such, a light multirole fighter would do…brings down to F-16, JAS-39, MiG-29…
However, it’s surely going to be F-16, because of American influence over the whole program. I wont go into pros and cons of Falcon vs Gripen and Fulcrum…but F-16 has a distinct edge over those two, and that’s not performance and price.
That’s overall bad situation. When an airforce isn’t dictated just by internal affairs, but external influences, also. Each country should tail it’s own aerial forces, to suit their needs.
Today, we get F-16 with AMRAAMs, tomorow, we might get a ban on spare parts and missiles. Just because the world affairs changed, and our bias turned against us. It’s always better to be neutral. Take SFRY for example; we used Sabres, Shooting Stars, Fishbeds and Fulcrums. Our domestic aircraft used AGM-65 and R-60 at once. SFRY was a friend of both USA and USSR…macropolitical situation dictates your “friends”, and if those are powerful enough, they can dictate your military equipment purchase also.
If you’re friendly enough with every big player, you can dance in the middle, and just get what you think is best. The big one won’t be mad at you when you purchase something from another big guy, because tomorrow you’ll purchase something else from him. Not to mention mixing technologies, if you have enough money. For example, if USSR’s got a nice airframe, engines and short-range missiles, and USA’s got a better radar set and BVR missiles, mix everything up. With proper funding, logistics and neutrality, everything is possible.
Without proper funding and with biased politics, you’ll be dancing to someone else’s song.
DISCLAIMER : this text is not biased, respected countries are given only for exemplary issues.
ZareAFAIK;
SPO-15 units that were fitted on Soviet 4th gen fighters, and some 3rd gen upgraded ones, have three distinct tones. Slow repeating beep, indicating a active radar emissions, fast repeating beep indicating an engagement (CW illumination), and constant beep, lock-on.
The source for alarming aren’t descibed via audio, rather via indicators. Thus, the sound of AIM-7 coming, and the sound of SAM missile coming, are the same. Pilot can recognize the threat type by visual symbols on the RWR panel.
You could try extracting the sounds from some combat simulation game.
ZareThe USSR and Russia never seemed to be fans of upgrading equipment once in service, they’d much rather replace it with a new-built improved version.
Correct…USAF only used five types of AAM’s. AIM-4, AIM-7, AIM-9, AIM-54 and AIM-120. Some of them were upgraded for years, doubling their performance in worst case, like Sidewinder and AMRAAM.
On the other hand, Russians; R-1U, R-3S, R-8, R-23/24, R-27, R-33, R-37, R-40, R-60, R-73, R-77, R-80…
Just like you said…no fans of equipment upgrade. They started heavy upgrades only when monetary basis dictated so.
ZareWell, you make my point…………First, Iran is only getting a small number of Mig-31E’s
It’s agreed on this; several of any aircraft won’t make significant difference, if you’re engaging modern airforce with hundreds on disposal.
As all we have to go on is Russian Brochures. (Oh, I feel better now!) Also, if history is any comfort. These types have not been successful in the past. Third, even if Iran could afford to procure Mig-31E’s in large numbers and they worked as advertised (both big ifs).
And all i have about Raptor is American information.
Look, we’re in no better position here, unless we take official info as granted before aircraft goes into action (both MiG-31 and F-22 case), what should we believe in?
The simple fact that both Soviet Union and Russian Federation spent a lot of money on Foxhounds, the latter throwing it’s national budget into upgrades which will keep MiG-31’s active for another decade, speaks a bit for itself, don’t you think?
F-14 was upgraded in a same sense MiG-25 was…better avionics, but only until a replacement came (F-18). MiG-31 was concieved because even Soviets weren’t that much satisfied with MiG-25 performance. Even pressure from Sukhoi, that Flankers should be used in former-PVO interception roles, didn’t do any good.
The hound is alive as before.
They would more than likely be destroyed on the ground by Cruise Missiles and Stealth Bombers. Further, even if a few did get airborne are you reasonably sure they wouldn’t be taken out by F-22’s………………
Don’t think so. With their range, they could operate from remote airbases, and they were designed to operate from rugged fields and such. Those aren’t Fulcrums, you don’t need to have them close to your enemy.
About F-22, even MiG-31E could detect it on a reasonable distance, where it could still disengage. F-22 cannot catch MiG-31, and AIM-120C maximum range against M2.35 object in tailchase should be around 15 km, if not less. Now, if that one pumps close to Mach 3…what’s the rmax then?
You are correct that “one” F/A-18 was shot down over Iraq in the first Gulf War. (lucky shot?)
Lucky shot? Hell no…MiG-25 used it’s endurance, speed, sensors and missile range, just like any interceptor should do. It just flew beside their SA domain, because it had speed and range to do so, mounted itself behind them, powered the IRST, and took down F-18 with R-40TD1.
It is highly unlikely that well-flown MiG-31 will enter WVR fight if its initial BVR attack fails. Its standard tactic is to turn 180 degrees and escape at supersonic speed. MiG-31 certainly has a performance and fuel capacity for such “hit and run” engagement. It should be treated with respect and caution.
Bingo. Even an simple Immelmann would do. The MiG-31 has more altitude than others, so trading altitude for speed and reversal would be a #1 option.
The thing is fastest combat jet around. It’s supersonic cruise is currently unmatched, it’s fastest, and it can cover more airspace than anything else. It has a sophisticated sensor system with a lot of power and a lot of range, and R-33 outranges all MRAAMs, even in it’s lousiest variant, R-33E. It can operate from all kinds of strips, it can act as mini-AWACS or interdirection aircraft.
If those aren’t the characteristics to respect…
ZareI hate to jump in but you are talking more in theory than reality! As the Mig-25 and F-14 made similar claims! On paper I have know doubt that it looks good. Yet, in the real world big interceptors like the Mig-25, Mig-31, and to a lessor degree the F-14 Tomcat. Haven’t performed well in that role. Really, the role of interceptor has never been very successful one and more than likely why hardly any country will invest in them………….
What’s wrong with jumping in? 😉
I find your reasoning a bit flawed. Don’t take this as an insult, it’s just that i tend to look at some things from a different angle.
First, you aren’t sceptical about MiG-31, you are sceptical about interceptors in general, right? Well…that doesn’t change the fact that MiG-31 is the most capable interceptor.
Second, it’s off-the-scale, from my perspective, to compare MiG-31 and F-14. F-14 was built as an fighter, for a interception role. It has missiles and sensors that can be compared with MiG-31(01DZ), but it doesn’t have any of Foxhound’s aerial interception performance…and that’s endurance, combat cruising speed, maximum speed and altitude.
Those that i mentioned, are even more important than Zaslon series or R-33/37 missiles. As our American buddies always tend to poke; you can upgrade radars and missiles, but you can’t upgrade to stealth. Just like that, you can’t upgrade an airframe optimized for subsonic endurance, and a maximum theoretical speed of Mach 2+, to one that can cruise 40 minutes at Mach 2.35, with a maximum redlined speed of Mach 2.83.
The role of the interceptor is a hard one…because it’s concieved as an part of the whole air-defence chain. Using interceptors as fighters, will do no good. If you want to be competent against USAF, you’ll need multi-layered airforce. You can’t use MiG-29A as air superiority fighter (Serbia)…you’ll need Su-27 for that.
Nevertheless, your assumption of MiG-31 being an easy bate for F-15/18 is just plain wrong. MiG-25 wasn’t much sucessful against teens in Gulf War, but it wasn’t bad overall…it scored a famous kill, against a most modern fighter of that time, and it did several mission kills also. It managed to evade AIM-120, on numerous occasions. And, Foxbats weren’t downed in large numbers.
Now, try to think this way : if Saddam had two-three times more MiG-25’s, to achieve number equality with the opponent, and if pilots were better trained, if morale was better overall…those 3rd gen fighters would be a headache for US pilots.
Note that i deliberately mentioned 3rd gen…they were going against aircraft that were generation ahead. In MiG-31 case, generations are equal. MiG-31 has the speed and altitude to disengage in case of threat. MiG-31 has enough radar power and enough missile range to fire a first shot. MiG-31 can stay way longer in air, than F-15/16/18.
It can control other fighters, and it can be the eyes of those who would be blind in other case.
However, buying a few downgraded MiG-31E’s won’t do…those are still capable, and could be a morale boost…on the first day of campaign, MiG scores a mission kill, or even downs a strategic asset or something else. However, the war outcome would remain same.
It’s like Poland (just for sake of example) bought five F-22’s, and entered a war against Russia. F-22 might be the best air superiority aircraft around, but it would get literally overrun by hundreds of Flankers.
ZareLOL! Um, no! Not even close. The newest variants of the F-15 with AESA radar is a better interceptor. So is the Eurofighter. Don’t even get me started on the Raptor. MIG-31 isn’t even on the same playing field. Not to mention all have far greater manueverability. The MIG-31, which is based on a MIG-25 airframe never had manuerability to speak of. It’s certainly fast though.
You are mixing the fighter and the interceptor.
F-15 can’t go 40 minutes on Mach 2.35, nor can Typhoon. F-22 can supercruise at Mach 1.7, but in the end, MiG-31 can still cover a wider territory, and it can cover it faster.
MiG-31 isn’t based on MiG-25 airframe.
None of those you mentioned use missiles that have R-33S range, let alone R-37 or R-37M/R-72.
For the time being, MiG-31 is the fastest, “tallest” fighting-aircraft around, and carries longest range missiles currently in service anywhere. The radar is very capable, and it’s a match for those missiles. That makes it the ultimate interceptor.
Besides, EF and F-15 would have tough time dealing with MiG-31B, let alone MiG-31BM or anything more advance. Simply because the thing is flying faster, higher, and it’ll shoot first.
How would you feel having 4 missiles fired at you, and you don’t know where the hell are they coming from (SARH) ?
F-15 is an multirole fighter, just like Typhoon. It can be used in interception role, in a same degree like Su-27P. It carries missiles with a nice range, has a very capable radar, but it has subsonic cruise. It can be used for interception…but it’s not a dedicated interceptor.
F-22 is another story, because it cruises at M1.7, and has very low RCS. Don’t really know how would the BVR between F-22 and MiG-31 go, because nobody here knows the RCS of the Raptor, and nobody here can conclude will the MiG-31 get a lock on the Raptor before Raptor steps into AMRAAM envelope.
ZareSo, I take it you believe the F-14D was the ultimate interceptor…….
No i don’t, and MiG-31 is the ultimate interceptor. You can compare Tomcat and Foxhound in both radar and weapon ranges, but you can’t compare their aerodynamic performance in interception role.
Eg. Tomcat can’t cruise at Mach 2.35, nor it can’t push up to Mach 2.83. Especially considering there’s no evidence that MiG-31 can’t go even faster. M2.83 is redlined, there’s a ground to believe that in case of emergency, it could push to Mach 3, like it’s older bro.
ZareThe Mig-31 like its earlier cousin the Mig-25 was easy meat for American F-15’s and F/A-18’s
Really? Because MiG-25 had short time on high supersonic speeds, and it’s missiles were comparable in range with AIM-7, yet more heavier (big warhead), suited for interception role.
Now this thing can detect F-15 well, well before the F-15 will get a chance to fire on it. It can use it’s speed, and height, to outrun anything. And by the way, if it managed to launch an AGM or ASM, the mission is over…there’s no point in chasing the Foxhound.
MiG-31 can fly 40 minutes on Mach 2.35. What’s the range of AIM-120C, when the target is running away at M2.35, tail-on aspect, and has more altitude? 10 km?
MiG-31 will never get that close.
By the way, it can engage 4 targets at once. R-33’s might not be the best option to shoot down fighters, but keep in mind; they are SARH missiles, the hound does not have the courtesy to disengage before the target was hit or missed, but SARH’s have one very nice advantage over ARH’s…the enemies EW systems don’t have a clue where the hell it’s coming from. They only sense the position of the illuminating platform, but missile won’t have the same trajectory.
Engage each F-15 with two R-33’s, and they will go defensive. I would go, that’s for sure, if my TEWS rang two launches, and i don’t know the missile’s whereabouts. Thus, each MiG-31 can effectively scare (or even hit) two enemy fighters, give itself enough time to pump up the burners and run for the ground based target. After dealing with two Amoses, Eagle would have no time to chase two and half times supersonic aircraft, let alone engage it. After A2G based launch, MiG’s could evade the same patrol by using a widened route, again at high supersonic speeds. Once it achieved enough distance, and once it came close to protected airspace, it can drop to M0.8 and safely land.
Foxhound can go 1500 km’s at Mach 2.35, and 3300 km’s at Mach 0.8. Combine those two numbers, and you could get a mission radius of over 1000 km. Simply because there’s no need to push it into supersonic cruise, until you came out of protected airspace. That counts for returning home, also.
MiG-31 is simply uncatchable for the time being. And it has big radar and big missiles. Those missiles might not have excellent PK against agile fighters, but any sane pilot wouldn’t just run into them. Especially when he doesn’t know where are they coming from.
Kinematic range of R-33S should be around 150km. That’s well above AIM-120C-5. MiG flies higher and faster. It would get the first shot against any American 4th gen fighter.
Keep in mind, this talk refers to my hypothesis of Iran purchasing something in range of MiG-31BS with A2G capabilities. That might not happen at all, but i was reffering that variant would be two times more capable for them, than MiG-31E.
IMHO, the only thing that’s currently better in BVR than MiG-31BM, is the F-22. Altrough that clash would still have grounds for big discussion.
Sign In
